Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 17 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: Yeah Keyvan, nice try, I am the one who just pointed that out to you. The frame used in the video that you posted uses z399 for an example. LOL - You did not point anything out to me Michael! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 21 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: "Nobody knew he was there...." Oh dear! What can the matter be? Keyvan pulled a vid Straight from the lavatry, Pics of an assassins From Z1 to 470 "and nobody knew they were there!" lol! Michael, you can do better than that! I had high hopes of a good debate with you! C'mon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said: LOL - You did not point anything out to me Michael! 1 hour ago, Michael Clark said: For reference, the frame that the Youtuber uses to point-out the sprocket-area anomaly is frame 399. The YouTube poster claims to explain how that is a reflection of a CRB shooter. He explains nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said: Michael, you can do better than that! I had high hopes of a good debate with you! C'mon! That wasn't bad, you must admit. I'll accept bonus points if the "Seven Old Ladies" Boy Scout song is stuck in your head! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: That wasn't bad, you must admit. I'll accept bonus points if the "Seven Old Ladies" Boy Scout song is stuck in your head! 4 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: You got bonus points, the song in stuck in my head now! 4 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said: In the YouTube film: People ran up the knoll to take shelter from the rooftop shooter? After the limo had left the Plaza? And the motorcycle cop ran up there for shelter, too? Junk, Junk, Junk. Does that YouTube guy make money for every viewing? Let's not pay him. Edited July 16, 2017 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 57 minutes ago, David Andrews said: In the YouTube film: People ran up the knoll to take shelter from the rooftop shooter? After the limo had left the Plaza? And the motorcycle cop ran up there for shelter, too? Junk, Junk, Junk. Does that YouTube guy make money for every viewing? Let's not pay him. LOL! Do you know how much longer after the shooting that people ran up the knoll? Here is the Hughes film from the Sixth Floor museum, people started to run up the knoll after the press bus passes. http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/search@/5/title-asc?t:state:flow=9082c688-0eac-4bf3-8199-7aa8a5efbaeb What is wrong with you? Don't you like to debate issues based on evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 21 minutes ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said: What is wrong with you? Don't you like to debate issues based on evidence? Keyvan, what you are basing your "debate" on is an absurdly ridiculous video, not evidence. You maintain that Zapruder's camera was catching reflections of a County Records Building shooter through the entire length of the film, even when that camera was pointed AWAY from the CRB. We are all aware of the rush of witnesses to the hill, when it happened, and why it happened; yet you insist on maintaining the absurd premise from the video that David properly labeled as "junk". The person who posted that video has the comments disabled for a good reason; his assertions are indefensible. He was smart to disable the comments, but you decide to carry that rubbish into this forum for debate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said: LOL! Do you know how much longer after the shooting that people ran up the knoll? Here is the Hughes film from the Sixth Floor museum, people started to run up the knoll after the press bus passes. http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/search@/5/title-asc?t:state:flow=9082c688-0eac-4bf3-8199-7aa8a5efbaeb What is wrong with you? Don't you like to debate issues based on evidence? Running for cover? That really boils my oil. All those people stepped-up with amazing courage and ran to see what they could do or find, women and elderly folks included. Yet, you label them as people fleeing from danger... All of those people were running INTO danger! Edited July 16, 2017 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 Michael You don't impress me with your use of the English language. WTF does normative mean? I would respect your post if you would point out the faulty logic of my post. And also speak for yourself don't involve anyone. Have the courage of your convictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 (edited) 41 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said: Michael You don't impress me with your use of the English language. WTF does normative mean? I would respect your post if you would point out the faulty logic of my post. And also speak for yourself don't involve anyone. Have the courage of your convictions. George, normative is the opposite of critical. Unfortunately, most everyone sees critical as necessarily negative. If I were "Bill's" boss, and I told Bill that he did a good or bad job, that would be a normative statement. If I told him that he mounted the tire backwards, or as I asked him to mount the tire, or as it is supposed to be mounted, those would be critical statements. Saying young George Washington chopped down the cherry tree is a critical statement. Saying George is a bad boy is a normative statement. And, to be sure, I agree, I had a mouse in my pocket when I wrote "we" or "us", or whatever it was. It's not something I normally do; my bad. Also, you may have noticed that most people here offer quotes when they call someone else's attention to something that they or someone else has said. Beyond general courtesy, there is a good reason for that. Allow me to make a normative observation when I point out that you should do the same. A critical observation is that you are not obligated to do so. Edited July 16, 2017 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 Michael Please explain the faulty logic. Why is my logic faulty? It's a cop out saying it was a rogue unit within the agency and not explaining where the rogue unit was located within the agency and which agents formed the unit. It's sounds great, but tell me who where and what. It means absolutely nothing if you can't back it up with names and departments within the agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 4 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said: Michael Please explain the faulty logic. Why is my logic faulty? It's a cop out saying it was a rogue unit within the agency and not explaining where the rogue unit was located within the agency and which agents formed the unit. It's sounds great, but tell me who where and what. It means absolutely nothing if you can't back it up with names and departments within the agency. George, I would be glad to clarify my "cop-out", but you'll have to quote me. I am not going to hunt-around for whatever it is that you that you are finding fault with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: Keyvan, what you are basing your "debate" on is an absurdly ridiculous video, not evidence. You maintain that Zapruder's camera was catching reflections of a County Records Building shooter through the entire length of the film, even when that camera was pointed AWAY from the CRB. We are all aware of the rush of witnesses to the hill, when it happened, and why it happened; yet you insist on maintaining the absurd premise from the video that David properly labeled as "junk". The person who posted that video has the comments disabled for a good reason; his assertions are indefensible. He was smart to disable the comments, but you decide to carry that rubbish into this forum for debate? Have you lost your mind? I am basing my debate on a video??? YES, the Zapruder film video. You need to step up your game! You are hell bent on debunking this, you need to learn how to debate. I will give you a quick educational primer after my response. Here is the Bronson film from the sixth floor depository. Bronson was using a similar camera that Zapruder was using. Those cameras when they are in full zoom, capture a reflection to the left side of the film. Here is a video of the same effect from the Bronson film You can see a reflection starting at about 33 seconds (Not of the rooftop gunman). BTW, with this film, you can also infer the length of time that took for the crowd to gather and rush up the hill. http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/search@/0/title-asc?t:state:flow=db56de8d-96a0-4e28-b46f-3a0d3b91b45e As for your debate skills:When I present constructive debate points, you need cross examine my affirmative position. Not come up with red herrings trying to distract everyone of your god awful negative position. What does a YouTube Channel having disabled comments or using negative connotations have to do with your answer? You can do better, I have a feeling that you can, take a really good negative position and let the chips fall where they may! Michael, It just crossed my mind that you might be a lone nutter theorist. Are you a lone nutter theorist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyvan Shahrdar Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: Running for cover? That really boils my oil. All those people stepped-up with amazing courage and ran to see what they could do or find, women and elderly folks included. Yet, you label them as people fleeing from danger... All of those people were running INTO danger! Running for cover???? Where are you getting this from? Do you believe that I stated that they where running for cover when they rushed up the grassy know minutes after the assassination occurred? If you believe that, can you show me where I mentioned that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now